This City Councilman Turned a $50K Deal Into a Personal Payday. Now He's...
Meet the Conservative Outsider Who Wants to Bring Common Sense Back to His...
How This Small-Town Police Force Became a 'Criminal Organization'
Iranian Regime's Latest Move Shows How Desperate It Has Become
House Republicans Want to Know Why Ilhan Omar's Income Jumped by 140 Times...
If 'The Only Thing More Powerful Than Hate Is Love' Democrats Missed the...
Elites Did Their Part to Fight Global Warming by Flying Dozens of Private...
Historic: U.S. Marks Ninth Month With Zero Releases at the Border
'Brass-Knuckled Hypocrisy:' Even the Washington Post Is Slamming Virginia Democrats' Redis...
Harry Sisson Refuses to House Illegals in His Home, And Claims ICE Agent...
Critics Blast Katie Porter's Pre Super Bowl X Post As She Tries to...
Here Is the Real Reason Bad Bunny Is Anti-American
We Didn't Think Progressives Could Make LA Any Worse, but They Can
Jasmine Crockett Might Be Running the Most Incompetent Campaign in History
WaPo Claims That Bad Bunny's Profane Performance Represented 'Wholesome Family Values'
Tipsheet

Win for Free Speech on College Campuses

The University of Arizona has rescinded its unconstitutional security fee for a David Horowitz event hosted by the College Republicans. The University forced the student group to have security at the event due to its controversial nature, and then billed the group for the services. The club then went to the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) for help. FIRE wrote to the university, saying:
Advertisement

Any requirement that student organizations hosting controversial events pay for extra security is unconstitutional because it affixes a price tag to events on the basis of their expressive content. The Supreme Court addressed precisely this issue in Forsyth County v. Nationalist Movement, 505 U.S. 123, 134-135 (1992).
University of Arizona's decision to absorb the security cost is a victory for free speech on college campuses. Adam Kissel, Director of FIRE's Individual Rights Defense Program, said:
One by one, universities are remembering their duty to protect controversial speech, rather than unduly burdening it or letting it be shouted down. Those who fulfill the important task of bringing dissenting viewpoints to the university must be protected from those who respond to dissent with violence or disruption.
Read more about the case here.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement